CES 2010: 3D Eye Solutions and Glasses-Free 3D

[dconnors]

3D with glasses might be OK for now, but glasses-free 3D is just around the corner...

CES 2010: 3D Eye Solutions and Glasses-Free 3D : Read more

 

[longerlife]

Would love to see this autostereoscopic in action, I can't imagine that it is as good or reliable as the glasses solution but would love to be proved wrong... (it would have been nice if there was a comparison made in the review).

 

[jkflipflop98]

Shutterglasses are so old-school. Why dont we use the polarized type of 3d? I saw a Muppets movie in 3d at Disney World years ago and it was the most convincing 3d image I've ever seen. What's stopping us from making a DLP TV with 2 perpendicular polarized light units?

 

[RooD]

I want hollograms, and i read awile back japan had hollograms you could feel... that would be awesome

 

[Guest]

Totally agree with jfkflipflop... Polarized 3d is sweet. I've seen Avatar twice and it's amazing. I don't know the technicalities but if they can use a projector in a theater, why can't it be done on a panel at home?

 

[anamaniac]

So, in 'adult entertainment videos', I've seen the 'moneyshot' miss and hit the camera.
Would I really want to watch 100 million gametes flying at me in 3D?
Though a funnier one was were the 'moneyshot' hit the cameraman, guy went balastic. =D

 

[jochamus]

@anamaniac

Righhhtttttt, did we really have to know this? It wasn't really very relevant now was it..

 

[cewhidx]

[citation][nom]jochamus[/nom]@anamaniacRighhhtttttt, did we really have to know this? It wasn't really very relevant now was it..[/citation]

Well, he did say in 3D...

 

[aethm]

[citation][nom]jkflipflop98[/nom]Shutterglasses are so old-school. Why dont we use the polarized type of 3d? I saw a Muppets movie in 3d at Disney World years ago and it was the most convincing 3d image I've ever seen. What's stopping us from making a DLP TV with 2 perpendicular polarized light units?[/citation]

IZ3D makes polarized LCD panels for 3D computer gaming. In TV's however, the cost would be very prohibitive. Imagine paying almost 2x for just 3D. The other problem is 2D image quality. It's not as good with 2 parallel screens. Shutterglasses work just as well. But there is the weight and batteries they require.

 

[teraflop122]

[citation][nom]Schmalgar[/nom]I don't know the technicalities but if they can use a projector in a theater, why can't it be done on a panel at home?[/citation]

Look up IZ3D for polarized 3D computer monitors.

 

[TunaSoda]

old

 

[Guest]

shutter glasses really aren't old school. LG had prototype shutter glasses that were as lite and comfortable as polarized and the quality is superior because you can see full frame for each eye without everything going through a polarizer twice.
also tom's need to do better reporting. philips closed down their 3d tv division and doesn't make them anymore.

 

[mergatroid]

Shutter, polarized and two colour glasses are all old school. They have all been around since I was a kid in the 70s, and some of them since the 50s.

I personally am not going to go out and replace my 1 year old 46" LCD TV just to get 3D. Especially if it requires using archaic glasses. For me, 3d has to be glasses free or I'm just not interested (at least for a big screen TV). I don't like being bothered by the glasses frames while I'm watching a movie or sporting event. I feel bad for people who are stuck wearing glasses all the time.

3D is just a way for the manufacturers to keep the prices of TVs high. They can't find any way to make them better enough to justify the high prices on new models, so now they're adding gimmicks to keep the prices up. You can now find brand name TVs for generic TV prices, so they have to do something.

No more new TVs for me until OLED and glassesless 3D.

 

[captaincharisma]

people don't give in to this 3D crap it nothing but a fad. the only tv upgrade that will be worth it is OLED sets

 

[palladin9479]

Glasses free 3D screens are VERY expensive. Used to be at least 3x the cost of a regular screen. They also require the content / software to be specially prepared / coded to support the stereo image. Stereo images are actually two different images placed ontop one another, so when watching Avatar your actually watching two different movies, one rendered for each eye. This is expensive to create and requires extra time.

I used to play 3D gaming with shutter glass's on a Nvidia 4 series GPU (like 8 years ago). It was an amazing experience, but the technology just wasn't there to do it properly. It will be the gamers who push 3D screens. LCD's just didn't have the refresh rate and detail to properly do 3D. Heck it took a high end CRT to play without getting headaches. Nowadays though things are shaping up differently, hopefully later this year I will be purchasing a newer LCD that supports 3D stereoscopic display.

 

[3dtvuk]

"It will be the gamers who push 3D screens"

Exactly what I've been saying!
http/www.3dtvreviewer.co.uk/do-people-want-3d-tv-with-glasses/2010/01/10/

 

[sonia275]

The problem with 3D Tv with glasses is that it can lead to headaches in some people after prolonged viewing. Toshiba already has the 3D technology without glasses and it unveiled it at the recent CES show at vegas here: http/www.3dtvs.me.uk/toshiba-3d-tv-without-glasses.html